Hot Topics in Affective Interaction: Applications, Design & Evaluation methods

1. Hot Topics in Affective Interaction:Applications, Design & Evaluation methods Tutorial at ACII 2007 Kristina Höök Professor Stockholm University

2. Hot Topics to be covered • Applications needed • to show where and how affective interaction has a place • to invent new interaction – not only improve what is there • Studies of applications crucial • for example, to realise the (obvious): emotion cannot and should not be separated from function, social setting, context in general • Affective interaction requires: • new theoretical foundations • new design & evaluation methods • new criteria and metrics • Usability of affective interfaces? • Not like “normal” usability in most cases

3. Applications • Very few built • Very few in commercial use • On the other hand, affect cannot (and should not) be isolated from the rest of the system • Only in academia does it make sense to separate and purify interaction aspects of a system • We now need to move on!

4. Applications - examples In industry: • Games! • Simplistic interactive characters on websites • …? From academia: • Affector • Affective Diary

5. Affector – Sengers et al.

6. Design method: autobiographical! • Two users (Phoebe and Simeon) are also designers and researchers! • One observer, also researcher • Went from “mood exchange” to • reflecting yourself in the system • aesthetic experience • sympathetic awareness of other

7. Affector - distortions

8. Affector – tool for design

9. Lessons learnt • emotion is part of everything (see also Sundström et al., 2007, IJHCS) • subjective experience hard to capture – ineffable even (?) • requires entirely new methods • move from “designer being empathetic with other user groups” to “designer being part of design” • … but is this the only way to deal with this?

10. Affective Diary • Collecting memories – including body memorabilia mingled with mobile materials (SMS, MMS, photographs, music listened to, video, …) • Offering a diary medium in which those memories can be mirrored and organised • Empowering the user to create meaning and alter those representations

11. Cultural probe 12 informants • Elderly • Teenagers • Dance teachers Lessons learnt • About yesterday, today, tomorrow • About someone/something • Brooding, shedding, take the lid off

12. Sketching

13. Carrying sensors

14. … demo!

15. Example: Affective DiaryMeaning-making, reflection and change ”[pointing at the first slightly red character] And then I become like this, here I am kind of, I am kind of both happy and sad in some way and something like that. I like him and then it is so sad that we see each other so little. And then I cannot really show it.”

16. How? • Start from users’ social and bodily practices • Leave surfaces open to be filled by users’ own content • Make others’ actions visible in the interface • Recognise that the artefact is a designed tool – not natural • Trust users to create their own meaning and be creative • Stage lived experiences • Start from the design material • Interact with and remind users of their bodily practices

17. Lessons learnt • emotion is part of life • bodily experience is part of emotional experience – but slightly mysterious to us? • meaning is constructed as part of everyday life – not given!

18. Theoretical foundations • Constructivist position – meaning is created by people in their everyday life – not given by system interpretation • Avoiding dualism – emotion cannot be separated from: • body • cognition • social context • Lived experiences – phenomenology?

19. Interaction design • Affective Diary and Affector exemplifies an interactional approach to how emotions are created in context together with others (see Höök, 2006, NordiCHI and Sengers & Gaver, 2005, HCII) • Several open surfaces that can be appropriated • Meaning-making is done by users • Characters remind them of their bodily encounters with the world

20. Methodological implications • Interpretative methods • autobiographical method • cultural probes • involving users in meaning-making • design-oriented rather than traditional usability testing-oriented • involving users in a dialogue rather than studying them • Emotion is not an add-on to existing interfaces • it is inseparable • entire context needs to be studied

21. In Situ Informants Think aloud Autobiographical design Persona Technical probes Ethnography Wizard of Oz Design Cultural probes Sensual Evaluation Instrument In the Wild! Brainstorming Early testing: staged lived experiences Interpretation Design study Bodystorming Tiny fingers Through user-centred design methods Fantastic product!

22. Sensual Evaluation Instrument

23. In Situ Informants: in search of ecological validity in the wild

24. Usability? • Usability traditionally focuses on goals such as effectiveness, efficiency, safety, utility, learnability, and memorability • Affective interaction focus on user experience goals – subjective qualities such as being fun, rewarding, motivating, satisfying, enjoyable, and helpful • How do we design for user experiences – and make sure that it works?

25. For both design and evaluation Two levels: • Sending/receiving the indended signals • Affective parts contribute to value of product  ?

26. Value of application? • Recognising users’ emotional states • To compute relevant response • To send info to surveillance system • To create compelling games • ... • Design for interactive emotional experience • To sell more products (e-commerce) • To enhance learning • To create loyal relationship • ... • Emotional expressions as a medium • To express yourself, be creative • To communicate with others • To create art • ...

27. Unique value of affect • What is it? • How do we capture it in studies? • How do we know when we are breaking the illusion and thus we need to fix the system?

28. Criteria and metrics – models http://www.xeodesign.com/xeodesign_whyweplaygames.pdf

29. Four pleasures Tiger (1992) Jordan (2000): • Physio-pleasures • Socio-pleasures • Psycho-pleasures • Ideo-pleasure

30. Evaluation • Notscientific evaluation of individual parts of an application/theory – those belong in your respective WPs and are only pre-requisites for usability of overall application • (Scientific) evaluation of the value of the application: does affect contribute anything to learning/loyalty/fun/ selling stuff/keeping user happy/... • Usable ≠ error-free

31. Hot Topics covered • Applications needed • to show where and how affective interaction has a place • to invent new interaction – not only improve what is there • Studies of applications crucial • for example, to realise the (obvious): emotion cannot and should not be separated from function, social setting, context in general • Affective interaction requires: • new theoretical foundations • new design & evaluation methods • new criteria and metrics • Usability of affective interfaces? • Not like “normal” usability in most cases

32. With Petra Sundström Anna Ståhl Martin SvenssonÅsa Rudström Alex Taylor Phoebe Sengers Katherine Isbister and others kia@sics.se